Automatism is the act done by the muscles without any control of the mind, such as spasm, a reflex action or a convulsion; or an act done by a person who is not conscious of what he is doing such as an act done whilst suffering from concussion or whilst sleep walking. There are two types of Automatism those are insane and non-insane automatism. Firstly, insane automatism is the disease of the mind as seen with M’Naghten rules, a not guilty verdict is the same as it is for insanity. Whereas Non-insane shows the actus reus has been done but not voluntarily, also the defendant does not have the mens rea present. Examples of non-insane is that the cause must be external and includes: A blow to the head, being attacked by swarm of bee’s, sneezing, …show more content…
Voluntary intoxication is knowingly and willingly choosing to take intoxicating substances, intoxication can not amount to any defence but does allow the decision to be made as to wether or not the defendant had the mens rea, if the defendant does not have the mens rea because of intoxication then they may not be guilty. Whether the defendant is guilty or not is dependant on two factors those being, if the intoxication was voluntary or involuntary, and if the offence charged is one specific or basic intent. Voluntary intoxication does not apply to basic intent cases. This is due to voluntarily becoming intoxicated it is considered to be reckless, in addition it can make the necessary mens rea apply. This was confirmed in DPP v Majweski (1977). This case says the defendant has taken a substantial proportion of drugs mixed with the consumption of alcohol, the charges being brought by the prosecution was ABH and three counts of assault the defendant claimed he had no recollection to his violence due to intoxication, he was found guilty of all charges. He appealed the verdict contending that he could not be convicted when he lacked the mens rea of the offence due to his intoxicated
The applicant Mr. Arthur Hutchinson was born in 1941. In October 1983, he broke into a house, murdered a man, his wife and their adult son. Then he repeatedly raped their 18-year old daughter, having first dragged her past her father’s body. After several weeks, he was arrested by the police and chargedwith the offences. During the trial he refused to accept the offence and pleaded for innocence. He denied accepting the killings and sex with the younger daughter.
In Reyes v. Missouri Pac. R. CO., the appellant, Joel Reyes, sought rehabilitation from the defendant, Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, after being run over by one of the defendants trains while lying on the tracks. The appellant claims the defendant was negligent due to its inability to see the plaintiff in time to stop the train. The defendant refutes the plaintiffs claim by blaming the plaintiff for contributory negligence because the plaintiff was believed to be drunk on the night in question based off of pass arrest records . In a motion in limine Reyes ask for the exclusion of the evidence presented by the defense. The trial court, however denied the plaintiff’s request and ruled in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff, Reyes,
Analysis / Ruling of the Court. The district court granted the employer’s motion for summary judgement on the sexual harassment claim due to the fact that Sherry Lynch treated both men and women equally in this case; that is, she behaved in the same vulgar and inappropriate way towards both genders. For this reason, Smith’s gender was not a contributing factor to the harassment, which is one of the conditions that would have to be met for the sexual harassment claim. The appellate court agreed and affirmed the district court’s judgement. The district court ended up excluding evidence pertaining to the sexual harassment claim because the sexual harassment claim had been dismissed on summary judgement, and because the court decided that the details of the harassment bore little relevance to the retaliation case whereas this evidence would be unfairly prejudicial to Hy-Vee. The appellate court affirmed the district court’s judgement. Smith did not offer any specifics on what evidence she would have wanted to present, which made it hard for the court to determine whether this evidence was material to the retaliation case or not. In her opposition to the motion in limine, she said she only wanted to discuss the harassment case in general, including mentioning that Lynch had harassed/touched her inappropriately. Hy-Vee had no objection to this, and Smith got to present this much evidence in the trial. Therefore, the appellate court found that she waived any objection to the
The defense has brought up his rough past without relating that time period with the situation we are in at the moment. The defendant does not seem to have prior outburst of any kind nor has he committed a crime that the jury was given throughout the guilt / innocence
The case State v. Snowden is an appeal by the defendant were the defendant pleaded guilty to an evidence charging Raymond Alien Snowden with the crime of murder of first degree. The trial of the defendant was represented by the district Court, 3rd Judicial District, Ada County, were Snowden entered judgment and sentenced of death but he appealed. Snowed was at a bar in the evening drinking and playing pool in a Boise pool room, he and other person visited another club near the one where they were playing pool, nearby Garden city. That same day Snowden and his friend visited several bars also drinking, at the end they stop at HiHo club. That same bar he met and starts having a conversation to this lady Cora Lucyle Dean, they start dancing and having a time together and they left together, while they were walking they start arguing in the street, because she wanted him to find her a cab and take her to back to Boise, but he said that he shouldn’t be paying her fare.
The respondent appealed with the Dallas Court of Appeals, Fifth Supreme Judicial District, 706 S.W.2d 120 (1986), Judge Vance affirmed the conviction, and a rehearing was denied.
The appeal was filed based on the fact that Smith’s presentence investigation report(PSIR) revealed that he had an extensive juvenile record which included a history of at least twelve offenses. Smith argued that he was entitled to resentencing under MCR 5.913, rewritten as MCR 5.925(E). The information in the PSIR was supposed to be automatically expunged pursuant to former MCR 5.913(People v. Smith, 2016). The Court of Appeals considered two panels of discussion before deciding in favor of the
from the victim and the scene of the crime be tested and his appeals were denied ("A.B. Butler").
In Shakespeare’s play Hamlet the main character Hamlet experiences many different and puzzling emotions. He toys with the idea of killing himself and then plays with the idea of murdering others. Many people ask themselves who or what is this man and what is going on inside his head. The most common question asked about him is whether or not he is sane or insane. Although the door seems to swing both ways many see him as a sane person with one thought on his mind, and that is revenge. The first point of his sanity is while speaking with Horatio in the beginning of the play, secondly is the fact of his wittiness with the other characters and finally, his soliloquy.
Insanity (legal sense): A person can be declared insane if they are conscious while committing the crime, committing the criminal act voluntarily, and had no intent to inflict harm. A person declared insane lacks rational intent due to a deficit or disorder, which inhibits their rational thinking
Edgar Allan Poe uses what can be considered a disturbed type of writing. The reason why Edgar Allan Poe became famous was due to the fact that he wrote stories related to horror and mystery. In the story “Tell-Tale Heart”, Poe used time, location, and mood and atmosphere, among others. Poe was considered to be insane, but to what extent did his insanity go, and where does his real ability to use setting as a way to set a dark tone begin?
How is that even possible? The dictionary definition of the word insanity is the state of being seriously, mentally ill (“Definition of the Word Insanity”). Insanity is also classified as a medical diagnosis. Insanity came from the Latin word insanitatem (“History of the Word Insanity”). People started using this word in the 1580’s. The Latins interpreted insanity as unhealthy Modern day society uses the word insanity too loosely. Although the dictionary definition of insanity is not wrong, several cases that prove having “insanity” does not always mean “being seriously mentally ill” has came to surface.
There are two types of automatism: sane and insane. Sane automatism is caused by an external factor and insane automatism by an internal factor. Automatism occurs when the defendant's conscious mind is not connected with the part of mind that controls actions. Insanity can be used where a disease of mind prevented the defendant from reasoning. Automatism and insanity excuse the defendant because his state of mind was such that he cannot be regarded as responsible for his actions. Both of these defences apply to all offences. Unlike automatism and insanity, diminished responsibility may be caused by external or internal factors ...
A defence in criminal law arises when conditions exist to negate specific elements of the crime: the actus reus when actions are involuntary, the mens rea when the defendant is unaware of the significance of their conduct, or both. These defences will mitigate or eliminate liability from a criminal offence. Insanity, automatism and diminished responsibility are examples of said defences. They each share characteristics but can be distinguished in their scope and application.
Intoxication: This means that the parties to the contract should not be under the influence of any alcoholic product such as drugs or drinks at the time of making of the contract. The case of Blomley v Ryan can be a good example of Intoxication. In this case Blomley was to purchase a farm from Ryan and at the time of contract Ryan was under the influence of alcohol so the contact was not enforceable.